Unless the footage didn't show guys face clearly. Then you get hella hard time because technically it's an evidence and arguing against evidence is always way

Unless the footage didn't show guys face clearly. Then you get hella hard time because technically it's an evidence and arguing against evidence is always way harder, even if the argument is "if you squint and imagine that this guy wore a wig and painted his face, here's an expert opinion that height and figure difference could be an illusion from camera position". Court almost always defaults to evidence and experts. Or it wasn't a burglary in your girlfriend house, but face/plate-matching algorithms screwed up. It's hard to choose between "police give hard time to victim and victim relatives" and "police randomly decides who fit the bill and get this person sacked"